The modern legal system is set to transfer financial resources from men to women. It is stacked against men, in that most accusations of rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment can instantly ruin a man who, by law, is presumed guilty unless proven innocent. We interview an "Extremist" who says feminist laws have perverted the legal and political system to an extent, that only a serious revolution can undo the damage.

A man, ruined beyond repair, by ex-wife and family court

Wayne Tippett has just two things of any real value left in his life: a 10-year-old car and a granite tombstone.

At 51, Tippett is broken, bankrupt and bunking in the guest room of his parents’ Burlington home after a divorce settlement that’s left him $75,000 in debt and racking up $1,000 more each month.

Today, he’ll appear in court at a default hearing to try to explain why he can’t afford to pay his ex-wife (the couple had no children) $3,300 a month, $16,000 in retroactive alimony and $42,000 of her court costs out of a complex case he himself still doesn’t understand. […]

Facing massive legal bills of his own, Tippett filed for bankruptcy and it was only later, he says, he discovered he’s still on the hook, under bankruptcy laws, for any payments related to the divorce case. That’s left Tippett in arrears that are growing monthly, on the default list of Ontario’s controversial Family Responsibility Office and facing seizure of his driver’s licence, his passport and, in time, a possible jail sentence. Devastated by divorce court

Extremist:

A good man, totally destroyed with absolutely no way out. In normal law, there is bankruptcy as a savior, and certainly debtor’s prison has been abolished long ago. If you cornered a rat Feminists manipulative control of the legal and family court system created a monster that subjugates men. And this exists world wide. In Brazil, soccer players get arrested if they are behind paying US$ 30 000 per month to their ex-wives. No matter if the short-lived soccer career took a hit and his income tanked.

Men are a bunch of lambs that obediently go to slaughter. Like the Jews went to the gas chamber. But it is worse then the Jews in WW II. There is no country persecuted men can flee to and get asylum. Oppressed exploited wage enslaved men are not recognized as persecuted refugees.

Such men can either suffer the rest of their lives in poverty, in the Gulag jail of feminist dictatorship. Or they can act like men and fight back.

Such kind of dictatorship is why the US constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. If you are violated by the government, you have to stand up against the government. Feminist injustice is so deeply entrenched, a violent revolution might be the only solution. The Boston Tea party was for some small taxation issue, not total ruinous exploitation.

Women did their revolution, with female trickery. Manipulative language, whining complaints, male benevolent chivalry, and pure male manipulability removed due process, justice, constitutional rights and freedom. Men were no match for concerted manipulations perpetrated by feminists.

Mr. Tippet above is a prime example how the Land of the Free has become a medieval terror regime.

Men are repressed cradle to grave. In kindergarten and primary school, boys fall behind because female-only teaching staff gears school towards girl’s preferences and punishes boys for being boys. Female indoctrination continues through University, where a terror regime of sexual harassment laws stifles academic freedom and research. .

Human-Stupidity:

We do stress that we do not advocate violence. Men should use legal ways to fight for their freedom and human rights.

But most men (or honest women) can understand the enormous hurt or rage that must be boiling in a man whose life got systematically destroyed, with absolutely no way out, by unjust cruel inhumane laws. The proper government, its courts and police are to blame for the unfair persecution ( compare Mr. Emerson).

What are the human rights of a person threatened by the unconstitutional dictatorship of the majority? This is similar to the problem of a man condemned to death by stoning for apostasy from a legally constituted governmental court in Afghanistan. But there are governments opposing stoning for apostasy, but is not a single government in the world publicly opposing egregious human rights violations like debtor’s prison for fathers unable to pay child support, or supporting the freedom of an underage boy forced to pay child support to his female rapist. For a man whose life has been utterly destroyed, maybe the only "non-violent" protest is self-immolation as chosen by a man described below.

A man kills his kids, out of despair and anger for being ruined by government powers, with absolutely no way out to get back a dignified life vs. Feminists unhinge constitutional guarantees because women are "devastated" because of innuendo or compliments

In the week when one father murdered his four children, and another was jailed for life, Lorna Martin investigates the motives and twisted minds of the men Americans call ‘family annihilators’. Are they driven by hatred, revenge or mad, possessive love? […]

Jack was three and Nina four. He strangled them with a pyjama cord and wrapped their bodies in duvets, before placing them in a cellar. […] His body was found hours later at the foot of a block of flats

The Guardian does not understand the immense hurt, and rage, in a man whose entire life is totally destroyed by a selfish vengeful ex-wife. Lose your home, your money, your children, and be indentured slave for life to pay for the convenience of your ex wife. With absolutely no way out. NO bankruptcy, he can not even flee to start a new life in Brazil, because they take away his passport and he will have a criminal and civil record.

None of this, of course, justifies killing the children. Even a terrorist should respect children. That is too low. Even killing his wife, while understandable, misses the real culprit. The legal family court system gives a woman all the power, and suggests to use and abuse that power. A woman needs to have excellent character to resist the temptation to get free money and long time support, as the law offers her.

The real enemy is the law, the feminists who inspired these laws, the legal system, parliament. The lawyers and judges who make a livelihood torturing and robbing men. And the stupid men who let this happen.

So if he had to go on a shooting rampage, the lawyers, judges, and feminist authors that inspired this, would be more deserving targets then his immoral wife who just takes advantage of her legal, though unjust, rights to demand support or to unjustly accuse of sexual violence.

Human-Stupidity:

Again, we can not advocate killing and violence. Violence is not the way.

But some serious action is needed to galvanize the resistance, or shake men out of their stupor.

Interestingly, feminists have even devised psychological diagnoses (battered-women-syndrome) to justify premeditated murder of women who always had the option to simply walk away from the allegedly abusive relationship.

Compare this to the men in our examples, that have absolutely no way out to flee decade-long financial exploitation and ruin. Some have life sentences with payment obligations until death!

Men are tough. Mrs. Clinton stated that women are the main victims of war, because the lose brothers, husbands and sons. The maimed or killed men themselves seem to suffer much less then their women.

It is important to compare men’s life threatening troubles to women’s "sensitivities" about tiny inconveniences that elicit pity and support in chivalrous men and a huge legal apparatus to remedy:

Men getting their life destroyed, decades slave labor to pay monthly ransom to ex-wives is considered a trivial. coincidence.

Women getting a clumsy compliment or sexual innuendo, or objectifying gaze, get "devastated", "constantly traumatized, according to the Sexual Harassment Industry, which portrays a social scene where women who experience sexual harassment are "devastated," go through it process of "grieving," and if they are lucky, emerge as "survivors." For obvious reasons, SHI rhetoric maximizes the damage supposedly inflicted on them: Sympathy will be garnered, counseling provided, male wickedness confirmed, and women’s victimhood" (Heterophobia)

Self Immolation as extreme protest and as way out

A very extreme action, without violence against others, is burning oneself alive:

At the time of his self-immolation, Ball was possibly facing jail time for owing about $3,000 in child support. He had been unemployed for the last two years.

Normally, American’s can’t be jailed for debt because debtors’ prisons were thought to be a nonsensical and barbaric practice that was outlawed in 1833.

Yet, the failure to pay child routinely lands American fathers in jail. Even if the fathers become unemployed or hospitalized, the judge could deny their petition to have their child support payments reduced.

Moreover, if the fathers are imprisoned, the child support payments can accumulate. Upon release, they are expected to repay the entire amount. Unfortunately, the US jobs market is notorious for shunning anyone with a criminal record, so the prospects of gainful employment look bleak for many of these fathers.

What else can happen to fathers who don’t pay child support (even for legitimate reasons like hospitalization)? Their cars can be seized and their passports denied, thus further taking away their tools for finding gainful employment.

A Buddhist monk burning himself in Vietnam gets more attention in the US press then a desperate American husband burning himself alive outside family court. How shameful! This should make it to the cover of the New York Times. Seems burning himself was not good enough. Maybe he should have blown up himself inside family court?

Men had overcome the middle ages, fought for human rights, liberal laws and freedom. All these achievements of humanity were destroyed by feminism in a century. Feminism has created a dictatorship, destroyed civil rights and due process, created dozens of new crimes (sexual harassment, offenses to women, DNA testing your own kid in Britain, sex with adolescents and mere possession of adolescent photos). Women wanted and got equal privileges plus special privileges before the law.

Divorce lawyer’s standard advice is for women to accuse their husbands of child sexual abuse, or domestic violence. This is like a trump card. No proof is needed, the man instantly is in the defensive.

Human-Stupidity:

Yes. it is shocking that a man gets into enough despair that he burns himself. it is shocking that the press takes almost no notice. And it is shocking that mainstream feminists complain that the man took the easy way out to neglect his payment duties to his wife and family.

Maybe the next self immolator has to douse himself in gasoline and then wait till the world press is ready to film him. he has to invent some mechanism that he can set himself ablaze even when hit by a Taser or rubber bullet. But, in such a case, his fire will be put out and the only thing he can achieve is getting severely burned.

It is a serious problem: how to defend your human rights against the terror regime of the majority? The Nürnberg process against Nazi henchmen convicted those who followed legitimate but inhumane orders. So what are the legal rights of a man destroyed by inhumane laws that are against democratic human rights traditions but that are the law of the land? What are the rights of a man convicted to painful death by medieval inquisition or Afghan religious courts that are the law of the land and supported by a wide majority?

What is missing is the public consciousness, that it constitutes white slavery and excessive cruelty

to jail man for not being able, or even for refusing to pay life long financial support to an ex wife that did not even mother any the subject’s children. Or

forcing a man to keep paying child support after he proved the children are not his. Or

for making it illegal for the man to do a DNA test on the children that are allegedly his.

This is why serious antifeminist activists seriously believe that Muslim law is the only salvation against feminist terror.

Women’s "rights" to life long support by an enslaved man

"The view now about marriage is that (both) parties are entitled, to the extent possible, to enjoy the same lifestyle after a long-term marriage," says Epstein, who sat on the committee that took five years to draft the guidelines. "We operate on a system that, if you create economic dependency (even if the wife isn’t tied to the home caring for children), then you’re going to have to redress it." Devastated by divorce court

Extremist:

Nowadays, the entire divorce proceedings, child support and alimony are made to squeeze the maximum amount of money out of a man. A man who took good care of his family and gave them a good standard of living, will get punished. He will have to continue providing the same standard to his distant wife. The wife will not have to provide the same standard of home care and sex. From the start he should have left them at basic subsistence level, so they would not feel entitled to maintain a high standard of living.

Totally absurd. Nobody has a guarantee for life-long maintenance of one’s life style. If she stays married, he can become poor. Even married families can lose their standard of living.

If you have 2 households, it is impossible to maintain the same standard of living. In practice, the woman maintains the same standard, the man has to work as a slave and lowers his standard. The man can not afford to have a new family. The woman can add the income of a new boyfriend or husband to the money given by the ex.

Divorce permanently guarantees the old standard of living, a guarantee no married wife has!? Let us be honest, in almost all cases this is a guarantee for women, to be paid by men. If women want men to maintain their life style, they should work to get along with their man. The perfidy of feminism is to insist that wives don’t have the duty to please their man, but men have the duty to support their bitchy wives for their entire lives.

Even children: if the woman wants the children to keep the same standard of living, she has choices: either she herself, as an empowered feminist woman, makes enough money. Or she leaves the children with the husband. Or she just makes a supreme effort to get along with the husband: you want money, you try to please the one who can give it to you. Simple!

In reality, there is no divorce for a man. The man continues with all the same obligations, or actually increased obligations. He has to pay for two households. He just loses all his rights (to see his children, to have sex, to get his house taken care of). What kind of divorce is that?

In marriage, traditionally a woman used to give sex, child care, household work in exchange for protection, security, money. Now women refuse sex, will not take care of the man’s house. But the man will continue paying? What a lop-sided agreement. Men’s bank accounts get robbed and raped.

Human-Stupidity:

I cannot but agree. I understand the anger. Still I plead for non-violence and search for democratic process.

Giving power and voting rights to women: a failed experiment?

Extremist:

Giving power to women was a noble experiment, It has miserably failed. Giving women the vote was a noble gesture, a well meant experiment. It was a terrible mistake. Women do not have the genetic apparatus to responsibly use power. In all of human and primate history, women never had absolute power without men having a clear veto right.

Men had the power for thousands of years. They did not enslave women. They did not invent crimes to lock them up in prison for decades. They fought for due process and other legal guarantees for men and women.

I wish you had shut up. This is misogyny. You must not even think such things.

Men’s rights advocates abhor extremism. People need to be egalitarian. Only feminists can espouse radical theories like the one that men should be eliminated and only left for insemination.

Extremist:

As long a men have the last word, veto power, women can have power. In all of history, men could have broken up cat fights and have the last word if women went overboard. Certainly they would have stopped Dworkin rape theories and Solana’s Scum Manifesto

By feminist medieval voodoo* logic mere copying, possessing or looking at adolescent nudity victimizes children, even if the "victims" have been photographed 80 years ago and are already deceased of old age. Feminists are not even interested in protecting children from real true abuse: Prestigious professor Milton Diamond furnished unassailable proof that availability of child pornography vastly reduces true assault of children

While women’s "liberation" demands and gets quotas in government and CEO offices, men shyly mention that there are no such quotas in jail, homelessness, garbage collection work. And just leave things that way, because women will not listen and men will not unite against injustice.

Either totally scrap all quotas and leave things to individual merit, or seriously pursue quotas to get a gender balanced 50% female jail population. There is no other way.

Imagine all the Millions men exploited by family court, plus all men locked and raped in prison for non-violent victimless sex offenses that would not have been crimes a century ago, unite and stand up against feminist fascism.

Men need to revolt and stand up against this institutionalized injustice. The original Boston Tea party was for much smaller injustices. After all, we still man the Navy seals!

Human-Stupidity:

I wish you had shut up. We will lose 97% of the men’s rights advocates who would support you for liberating men from debtor’s prison, but who wholeheartedly agree to 25 year prison sentences for men who copy computer files of 0’s and 1’s.

And, of course, I reiterate that non-violent legal means should be found.

Extremist:

Sorry, I tried to shut up, but my conscience does not allow me to be silent about an issue that cause immense suffering to both men and children because it

causes thousands of men to be locked up and raped in prison, and then have their life destroyed permanently due to sex offender registries

that invalidate sex offender registries by confounding true child rapists with harmless wankers who look at photos, and teenagers having consensual sex. Those 5% truly dangerous criminals disappear in the sea of harmless offenders. Furthermore, we don’t have registries for arsonists, gang bangers, repeat robbers and other true dangerous criminals.

prevents us from taking the right measures to save children from sex predators.

I almost shut up, obeying your concerns. But repression of child pornography actually victimizes children, because Dr. Milton Diamond has clearly shown that it increases victimization of children. He is the same guy that clearly showed that availability of porn reduces sex crimes against adult women. The reason is that horny perverts can act out their sex drives in the privacy of their homes and masturbate their sex drive away while watching porn.

It is very clear that true child-attracted perverts can masturbate with child pornography and thus lose their incontrollable drive to hurt actual children. The campaign against child pornography is even more useless then alcohol prohibition and marijuana prohibition. Because alcohol causes real damage while copying computer files with 0’1 and 1’s in them causes damage only in the phantasy of voodoo* believers.

So I can not shut up to be politically correct to please feminists and sex-averse men’s righters, while in fact damaging real children. My conscience does not allow watching while children get endangered for political and religious creeds.

Dr. Diamond himself was scared and thus advocated only artificially computer created child porn. He would not dare to say the obvious, that child porn older then 30 years could also be grandfathered, plus all child pornography that depicts legal acts with clearly no victims.0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Compare the Copine scale

I must not allow feminist and religious fanatic dogma to create laws that harm our children. This is against my conscience.

Pregnant women can, with total impunity, permanently damage their fetus with fetal alcohol syndrome. No legal sanction for that, not even societal shunning.

Much less is there punishment for obese women overeating and giving birth to a baby disposed to life long overweight, additionally compounded by sickening unhealthy junk food for the toddler, guaranteeing his life long misery as an overweight fat sick loser. 1, 2, 3, 4

The entire world wide obesity epidemic is fueled by obese mothers being the main culprit for feeding damaging food to non-consenting toddlers (toddlers are unable to consent to unhealthy food, much more so then 17 or 15 year olds allegedly are unable to consent to sex). People obsess about child porn while missing the true menace, world wide obesity epidemic that we imprint onto our unsuspecting innocent children We poison our innocent children with junk food and sedentary life style into a world wide health epidemic. And the selfish idiotic women’s movement is concerned about the profound life changing trauma of cat calls and objectifying gazes.

Human-Stupidity:

No serious person can contradict you here. Women are responsible for uterine environment, for breast feeding, and in reality for a large part of feeding of toddlers. Even for calming boys in kindergarten and school, stopping their natural urge to move and exercixe. Feminists are amazingly unconcerned about those health hazards. This reinforces the antifeminist trade union theory, also repeated in Patai’s book: Feminist goal is not saving children, but repressing heterosexual men by instilling terror.

13 Comments

Hmmm says:

This article struck me as a bit biased against women, which is sad as it seems the fight ought to be leveled against ‘the system’. Mr Ball owed $3000 to his ex wife which was half of his childrens medical bills. He has years to pay this money. 10 years as a matter of fact. But that’s besides the point. He had a prior arrest record for abuse of his child. His wife would have been arrested as an accessory had she not pressed charges once police were involved with the incident. Once abuse is reported it is very difficult to wipe the slate..this is what breaks up families. It is sad and ironic that he would abandon his children by taking his own life. I understand the point you are trying to make, but the finger pointing detracts from your message.

To address Hmmm, if society hadn’t made it easier for men to get domestic violence convictions and harder for women to even be looked at for the same infractions against the law or their children then it is like the kid that is bullied by more than one person. It wasn’t the first comment that caused them to take their own life, it was the consequences of usually hundreds of comments and teasing that goes on in a teens life.

Second, there is two things about ALL human beings that has never changed in many millenia. First, People are NOT NICE. Second, People are Opportunists. These two things make it impossible for our species of human animal to ever be ‘impartial’ or ‘fair’. With that said, the campaign against the male gender of the species of Human Animal, only supports that.

I will never say that battered women (where some of this man bashing started) was not needed. But instead of beating down the other gender, why didn’t we just teach the ‘fairer sex’ to defend themselves better? I know that if any of the male gender were to try to prey on me again, I would fight for my life yet again. But I wouldn’t expect someone to do my battles for me even. That is the issue, women don’t want to work for what they believe is ‘their right’. In this world somethings have to be earned, respect, trust, things like that. Yet our laws are designed to only trust victims even if they are not credible for anything else. They are trusted and stories accepted without question and with out verification.

Do not get me wrong, I am a woman and believe that I should be treated just like any man is, that means from hiring to firing in any job, and if I can’t do the work then they should get someone in there that can. It just isn’t good business not to, but to not talk to someone because they are of a certain gender or a certain color or a certain anything is absurd. Then again, maybe it is just me, but I have always been able to get my point across to let people know that I am as capable if not more so than any man I have competed against. (I also work in a predominantly male profession, Information Technology)

Robert in Toronto says:

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 81

Women are opportunistic psychos. My ex-wife used all the tricks & won. She is ADHD-pi, BP, BPD, ODD, OCD. Literally a narcissistic sociopath. She got everything because of the system. She has proceeded to take both our children from passing & honors to Special Education & failing High School. She is the first to claim victim status because people in general are unwilling to see women as capable of such malfeasance. Fine, blame it all on men. She is a 300 pound psychotic cow, Dad is out of the picture, the kids are down the toilet.. two lawyers made $25K in the process. That is how it works.

There is no valid reason for marriage any more, from a man’s standpoint. Guess what, I was also a stay-at-home Dad because of her neglect. She still twists that one too.

Pointing out the Obvious says:

So you chose to marry someone who “is ADHD-pi, BP, BPD, ODD, OCD. Literally a narcissistic sociopath… a 300 pound psychotic cow” and so all women are opportunistic psychos because of your experience with her? Exactly how much time did you spend getting to know this person before deciding to get married and have children? Grow up.

Ted says:

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 50

Keep it up, Bambi…You’re destroying your own life and the lives of all feminists that follow. Keep it up, Bambi…You’re devaluing the millions of male souls that gave their lives so that you could fix your hair and makeup. Keep it up Bambi…You’ll soon be raped, beaten, enslaved, or murdered by foreign soldiers that don’t have the same values with regard to ‘women’ that American men held most close to their hearts (research the many billions of frustrated Chinese men and Islamic men headed your way). I for one will lower my weapon in battle to see skanks like you eradicated from the earth. You Bambi will be the first thing I throw to our future enemies (with a really big smile on my face). You Bambi will wonder what happened to all of those egotistical, disgusting, dirty men that used to defend your worthlessness. We men won’t be there to protect scum like you, Bambi.

Alan Vaughn says:

Like or Dislike: 42

Most people reading Robert’s comment would know that he didn’t marry a woman like you describe, thus question his choice to marry and would be able to reasonably assume that the woman he married, gradually over time (as she was gradually indoctrinated with feminist misandry and associated dogma), EVOLVED into the woman he finally divorced…

He perhaps should have written for the benefit of the not so literally intuitive reader, such as yourself:
“She is NOW ADHD-pi, BP, BPD, ODD, OCD. Literally a narcissistic sociopath”…
and:
“She is NOW a 300 pound psychotic cow”…

Equalist says:

Like or Dislike: 41

Dear Extremist, our feminist dictatorship is anti-men, not pro-women. Our feminist rulers and collaborators would ruin 2 women in order to ruin 1 man. We see it in court cases where ex-wife testifies against her ex, and his mom, sister and 2nd wife support him, because they depned on him. And they get shafted together with him.

Women consume more than produce, and the difference has to be covered with exploitation of men, in form of husbands, taxpayers etc. If the productivity of men decreases, all women loose, because they have less to exploit. IZ